(A scientific debate over the use of stimulant drugs and enhance performance and thinking)
Funny. When I was a skinny adolescent in the 60’s, popping amphetamines with my peers, I thought we were just getting high. And we did. It never occurred to me that I was engaging in “cognitive enhancement”. But now, high-powered executives, researchers and others in thinking and performance-intensive positions are using prescriptions drugs like ‘Adderall’ and ‘Ritalin’, really just fancy names for what we used to call ’speed’, to improve their concentration, focus and effectiveness on the job.
Naturally, this has touched off a debate in the scientific community over the desirability, and dangers, of using drugs to be better than you are. Time magazine documents the various positions of experts in a pretty balanced way. Because, despite all you’ve heard about the damage that can be done, is being done by artificial stimulants, mainly on the street level, it turns out that taking these medications, as prescribed, under medical supervision, actually does result in cognitive enhancement.
Researchers, using an admittedly small sample, have watched closely as top executives and scientists used drugs like Adderall. Their ability to stay on task, perform above-level and think with greater clarity actually have been improved. The use of these medications has become widespread enough – in the workplace and on college campuses – that a panel of seven bioethicists and neuroscientists published an editorial in the journal Nature recently advocating their use – within narrowly defined parameters, of course. Among other things, the authors wrote, “Cognitive enhancement has much to offer individuals and society, and a proper societal response will involve making enhancements available while managing their risks.” It’s that second clause of the statement that gives me pause.
It may be true that perhaps 90% of the population, give or take, could use drugs like Adderall, Ritalin or modafinil, with the results mentioned above. After all, fighter pilots use stimulant drugs to improve awareness, enhance response time and stay alert. But within the ten to 20% of the populace with a ticking time-bomb called “addiction” waiting to be activated in their brains, a prescription for Adderall could be a one-way ticket to hell. And frankly, with all due respect, it is the rare doctor who knows enough about addiction to spot the warning signs in time.
There is another negative social aspect to all this: sure, corporate bigwigs, researchers and other high-level professionals might have access to these performance-enhancing drugs, but what about the rest of us? Hell, I’d love to have my writing performance improved through the simple expedient of popping a pill. But where do I find a doctor who knows enough to prescribe and closely monitor their use, does my state even define dispensing Adderall as a “medical use”, and will my insurance, assuming I have any, pay for it? Because this stuff gets expensive.
On the other hand, proponents of artificial cognitive enhancement envision teams of scientists working on, say, a cure for cancer or AIDS – their stamina, concentration and performance all bumped up through the use of a simple chemical. I have to admit it’s an attractive notion, for all that it conjures up visions of Aldous Huxley’s “Brave New World”.
Science is leading us in directions with tremendous potential, for good and ill. Those who cannot, for whatever reason, gain access to cognitive enhancing drugs will inevitably create more of a black market for them than already exists. I need hardly recount what street dealers mix in with legitimate medication to make them cheaper to manufacture and more dangerous to use. And there is the problem of addiction, which in each individual is something of a crap-shoot. Addiction to alcohol and other drugs costs our society incalculable sums of money, in medicine, crime and the overall quality of life. That doesn’t even touch on what it does to addicts and their families.
Scientists have a way, detached as they often are and must be to do their jobs properly, of oversimplifying. This works for that, so do it. Never mind whether it should be done. But, even in writing this, I feel like one trying to hold back an avalanche. The drugs are out there, cognitive enhancement is a reality and we can look forward to more and more of our citizens, especially those in the upper echelons, to turn to their use. Consequences?Unknown, but dangerous.
So Now They’re Calling Them “Smart Pills”
(A scientific debate over the use of stimulant drugs and enhance performance and thinking)
Funny. When I was a skinny adolescent in the 60’s, popping amphetamines with my peers, I thought we were just getting high. And we did. It never occurred to me that I was engaging in “cognitive enhancement”. But now, high-powered executives, researchers and others in thinking and performance-intensive positions are using prescriptions drugs like ‘Adderall’ and ‘Ritalin’, really just fancy names for what we used to call ’speed’, to improve their concentration, focus and effectiveness on the job.
Naturally, this has touched off a debate in the scientific community over the desirability, and dangers, of using drugs to be better than you are. Time magazine documents the various positions of experts in a pretty balanced way. Because, despite all you’ve heard about the damage that can be done, is being done by artificial stimulants, mainly on the street level, it turns out that taking these medications, as prescribed, under medical supervision, actually does result in cognitive enhancement.
Researchers, using an admittedly small sample, have watched closely as top executives and scientists used drugs like Adderall. Their ability to stay on task, perform above-level and think with greater clarity actually have been improved. The use of these medications has become widespread enough – in the workplace and on college campuses – that a panel of seven bioethicists and neuroscientists published an editorial in the journal Nature recently advocating their use – within narrowly defined parameters, of course. Among other things, the authors wrote, “Cognitive enhancement has much to offer individuals and society, and a proper societal response will involve making enhancements available while managing their risks.” It’s that second clause of the statement that gives me pause.
It may be true that perhaps 90% of the population, give or take, could use drugs like Adderall, Ritalin or modafinil, with the results mentioned above. After all, fighter pilots use stimulant drugs to improve awareness, enhance response time and stay alert. But within the ten to 20% of the populace with a ticking time-bomb called “addiction” waiting to be activated in their brains, a prescription for Adderall could be a one-way ticket to hell. And frankly, with all due respect, it is the rare doctor who knows enough about addiction to spot the warning signs in time.
There is another negative social aspect to all this: sure, corporate bigwigs, researchers and other high-level professionals might have access to these performance-enhancing drugs, but what about the rest of us? Hell, I’d love to have my writing performance improved through the simple expedient of popping a pill. But where do I find a doctor who knows enough to prescribe and closely monitor their use, does my state even define dispensing Adderall as a “medical use”, and will my insurance, assuming I have any, pay for it? Because this stuff gets expensive.
On the other hand, proponents of artificial cognitive enhancement envision teams of scientists working on, say, a cure for cancer or AIDS – their stamina, concentration and performance all bumped up through the use of a simple chemical. I have to admit it’s an attractive notion, for all that it conjures up visions of Aldous Huxley’s “Brave New World”.
Science is leading us in directions with tremendous potential, for good and ill. Those who cannot, for whatever reason, gain access to cognitive enhancing drugs will inevitably create more of a black market for them than already exists. I need hardly recount what street dealers mix in with legitimate medication to make them cheaper to manufacture and more dangerous to use. And there is the problem of addiction, which in each individual is something of a crap-shoot. Addiction to alcohol and other drugs costs our society incalculable sums of money, in medicine, crime and the overall quality of life. That doesn’t even touch on what it does to addicts and their families.
Scientists have a way, detached as they often are and must be to do their jobs properly, of oversimplifying. This works for that, so do it. Never mind whether it should be done. But, even in writing this, I feel like one trying to hold back an avalanche. The drugs are out there, cognitive enhancement is a reality and we can look forward to more and more of our citizens, especially those in the upper echelons, to turn to their use. Consequences?Unknown, but dangerous.
This entry was posted on January 6, 2009 at 11:28 am and is filed under general commentary. You can subscribe via RSS 2.0 feed to this post's comments. You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.